|
|
Tags for This Article:
Military (2981) Antiwar Movement (280) Antiwar (275) Military Active-Duty (226) Military Conractor Corruption (74) Military Back Door Draft (66) Donors (53) Military Assassinations (35) Military Appeal For Redress (31)
|
Add to My Group
On this "Super Tuesday" primary, it's worth noting that members of the US military favored antiwar candidates with their campaign dollars. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, they gave the most money to Texas Republican Ron Paul, who voted against the Iraq war and advocates a complete and immediate withdrawal of all US troops, with at least $212,000 in contributions. Barack Obama was second with about $94,000. Here at War Comes Home, we first noticed this trend back in October, when the Houston Chronicle reported Paul and Obama were getting the most money from members of the Armed Services. Did you know? More than 72,043 American soldiers have been killed, wounded, injured, or ill as a result of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan How well do you know your facts about U.S. veterans returning from Iraq or Afghanistan? Take the War Comes Home "Did You Know?" Quiz and find out! warcomeshome.org Pacifica radio network reporter Aaron Glantz is author of the new book "How America Lost Iraq" (Tarcher/Penguin). More information at www.warcomeshome.org
Propaganda Barack Obama is a pro-war candidate not an anti-war candidate. The only anti-war candidates are/were Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and Mike Gravel. How much did the military give Dennis Kucinich? I don't see anyone donating to Mike Gravel. by
Ty (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 821 comments)
on Tuesday, February 5, 2008 at 2:10:28 PM
You're right about Obama, Kucinich and Gravel but I think the even more interesting question would be why on earth would the MIC support Ron Paul? It seems to me that Paul is a republican freak. Being a republican doesn't seem to suit him. Or does it? Perhaps he and they know more about this then we do! Or perhaps the MIC sees an opportunity in removing themselves from the idea in a fix if they support a candidate they know doesn't stand a chance in hell. Although I like a whole lot of Paul's platform and agree with him totally about the war, NAFTA, the WTO etc., one thing I find disturbing is his libertarian idealisms in small government. Let's not forget the libertarians have been playing a shell game with the neocons. Also, the neocons have already drowned the government in the bathtub.... that is the government of "We the People!" I can understand rolling back military funding and deprivatizing government to restore sanity but if big government does not metamorphasize from a nanny state for the rich into a New Deal for the poor, the millions who have already been disenfranchised along with the many millions more who will follow won't stand a chance in hell. On this note it makes me believe that Paul is either completely removed from the economic realities or indeed first and foremost, he is a republican. by
Michael Shaw (7 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 330 comments)
on Tuesday, February 5, 2008 at 2:33:53 PM
Political Activist for Freedom, civil rights, and common sense from all persuasions. I would like to legalize the Constitution.
Limited Federal Govt... He only differs from Dems on which level of Govt the social program should be handled on. If we keep filtering our money thru Washington, you can bet that some of it will stay in their pockets. It is much more efficient to keep it at the state level and fund the Social Safety net there. It also happens to follow the Constitution. He is, in fact, one of the few members of congress who has voted to preserve Social Security money and has an actual plan on how to save it for those who are already dependent. Too many of his positions have been misrepresented by the media or given buzz word labels to scare the moderates and Democrats. I have never voted for a major party for President before, because they have never stood their ground on the actions and votes they took. I have consistently voted for Independents and Dems in local elections. And this year I am campaigning for the only candidate I can trust. by
Highstreet (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 26 comments)
on Tuesday, February 5, 2008 at 2:52:42 PM
The Purpose of Government What do you want? Do you want a government to take money from others, theft by taxation, to distribute to others less fortunate? Than you don't want to live in a constitutional republic. You prefer socialism. If you constantly turn to government to solve your problems, you end up with what we have now. The path to freedom goes straight through responsibility. I work with homelss people, the vast majority of which seem to be veterans, and they don't want handouts. They want what all of us what, A CHANCE. The vast partion of our national wealth is controlled by A VERY small group of wealthy people that control the banks, corporations, and government that runs our lives. The path to freedom involves getting control of our currency, getting rid of the central banking system, and abolishing the income tax. Only one candidate speaks to this truth. One who refers to him as a freak is sadly ignorant of the real issues, but correct nonetheless. On the other hand, if we were all freaks like Ron Paul and we banded together and quit wishing we could re-make our government into the benign patriarch we wish would save us, then the elites that own us would have no chance at all. What do you want? Opportunity or guarantees? Freedom or safety? by
Bob Tracey (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 41 comments)
on Tuesday, February 5, 2008 at 3:22:21 PM
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
